The landmark Jimenez ruling, handed down on 20 October 2017, has clarified once-and-for-all that the degree to which HMRC can investigate the tax affairs of overseas individuals is much reduced, says Steve Thomas, solicitor at Excello law and representative of the appellant
In the case of Tony Michael Jimenez v HM Revenue & Customs and Other [2017] EWHC 2585, the claimant, Tony Jimenez, represented by Steve Thomas of Excello Law, Rory Mullan of Counsel and Gary Brothers of Independent Tax, challenged HMRC’s rights to serve him a production notice at his Dubai home after he had properly cut ties with the UK and was no longer a UK resident.
Despite having left the UK in 2002, the Brixton-born football agent continued to voluntarily cooperate with HMRC until in 2012, an investigation was launched into his tax affairs.
It was at this point that the past co-owner of Charlton Athletic Football Club decided to challenge HMRC’s probe into his financial affairs.
The main question of the case was to what degree can HMRC exercise power outside of the UK? In the case of Jimenez, a notice under Schedule 36 of the Finance Act 2008, which does not exist to subvert the sovereignty of a foreign state, like the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E). The claimant’s case was that such a notice did not have extra-territorial effect and therefore, the HMRC has no right to issue a notice to his house in Dubai.
